This board is a composition workshop, like a writers' workshop: post your work with questions about style or vocabulary, comment on other people's work, post composition challenges on some topic or form, or just dazzle us with your inventive use of galliambics.

i imagine many of you are not currently overloaded with things to do, especially in the scholarly field.
accordingly, i challenge all people interested to write an elegiac couplet. just one - in latin or greek.

most of you, i should think, are familiar with basic prosody and can scan. if not, there are many fine sites online that can introduce you to the basics (for that is all here necessary).

the mechanics of the metre are very simple. an elegiac couplet consists of two verses, the former in dactylic hexameter, the latter in dactylic pentameter.
the most basic metrical rules that must be followed are these:

for the hexameter:
-the first four feet should be either a dactyl (long-short-short) or a spondee (long-long)
-the fifth foot must be a dactyl (special licence for Greek proper names and effect need not be considered at present)
and the sixth a spondee or trochee (long-short)
-there must be a caesura (i.e. a gap between words in a foot) after the long of the third foot (so-called 'third strong' caesura) OR, if this is not the case, a caesura after the first short of the third foot ('third weak') backed up by BOTH a strong in the second AND in the fourth.
-the metrical scheme for the hexameter is thus:
(~ marks long; u marks short; / separates feet; // marks main caesura):

the line is thus as dactylic as possible (Ovid's purpose, incidentally, is to pretend that he is writing epic at the very start so the characteristic tum-ti-ti of the dactylic hexameter is over-used. lines with the first four feet as dactyls number only 6.7% in the Corpus Ovidianum.)

the following line is the pentameter, so called (rather inappropriately) because the metrical 'value' of its constituents 'add up' to five dactylic feet.

the main rules for the pentameter:

-the first half of the line has two feet that can be either dactyls or spondees, followed by a long syllable (this can be long of itself or lengthened by position)
-the second half of the line has to be two dactyls, followed by an anceps (i.e. either a long or a short syllable).
-there must be caesura after the end of the first half (so after the long on its own).

Ovid has continued the silliness and retained as many dactlys as possible in this line.

One final essential point needs to be observed for the pentameter line of LATIN elegiacs:

the last word must be disyllabic, i.e. words of three syllables (or more) or monosyllables are prohibited. [for those interested, prodelided forms of sum are permitted and Greek proper names of polysyllabic nature are occasionally accepted, but are not to be imitated here.]

so, i hope my instructions have not been too haphazard and that the basics are understood. if any of you can pull off a couplet, that would be superb. if anyone is especially interested, i will append some more detailed notes on the latin elegiac (for it was more polished metrically, in the guise of Ovid, than the counterpart of its sister language).

work out the english first, then tackle the end of the hexameter, then the start, and fill the middle.
in a single couplete it is best to have the punctuation (if any) at either the end of the hexameter or at the main caesura of the pentameter, the last full or half pentameter somehow responding to or qualifying the rest.
the hexameter should end with a di- or tri-syllabic word, though a monosyllable with good cause is permissible here.
the last dissyllabic word of the pentameter should not be an adjective or adverb, but a verb, noun or pronoun.
it is favourable for both the hexameter and the pentameter to start with a dactyl rather than a spondee.
don't forget that final -m elides before a vowel and 'h' - therefore no short syllable can end in 'm'.
a word with a cretic rhythm (long-short-long) can go NOWHERE!
[the first solo long syllable of the pentameter (i.e. the syllable between the third and fourth feet) should not be a monosyllable, unless preceeded by another monosyllable or a word that is a pyrrhic (short-short)]

as i mentioned in brackets earlier on, prodelided forms of sum, especially est are tolerated at the close of the pentameter, for they form the latter syllable when prodelided with the preceeding disyllable.

my finest commendations to Will. with little surprise your prosody and syntax is without flaw (the thinking man indeed uses dative with enochlew!). the 5th foot spondee is a licence well used, surely for the gravity of my Draconian demands. finally, the flow of the pent., with such exquisite use of the two hemiepes, is to be envied by all.
i surely would, as you no doubt should, be proud.

Oh no! Me miserum. I am totally ignorant of the rules of Latin poetry, and I am no good at composition of English, let alone Latin.

I think I should use what I compose in my libretto (for a hopefully good Latin opera, which I entitle "Vesuvius et Campania") , but I don't know what to write about. The plot so far: after the celebratory night of Vulcanalia, where the drunk men have beseeched the god's wife Venus for protection, but have turned the chorus into a debauched plea to Venus for love. Deeper into the night, a few Grecians give a small chorus that pleas with the Fates on the night (it is the day of Moira and Nemesea, please pardon my bad transliterated Greek). Another tremor strikes, but the Pompeiians dismiss as another troublesome tremor. The next morning, Eumachia (was she alive in 79AD?) goes out and admires the Bay of Naples. The fisherman from Herculaneum sings a small recitative hoping for a good catch, and a plea to Neptune. Next is a sinfonia called "Ad Forum".

Then I'm stuck.

Please help. Please. I beg you. Please.

When does a plosive and a "liquid" equal one consonant?

I admire you, Annis, even though I do not understand it.

Last edited by Michaelyus on Wed Aug 04, 2004 10:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I have a question. Since Latin words are based on accent rather than pitch, would not elegiac couplets (or any Greek poetic meter for that matter) be inappropiate for the Latin language?

I would love to write a couplet, but I do believe that Iambic poetry better suits my temperment if you know what I mean.

~[face=SPIonic]e(khbo/loj[/face]

Fanatical ranting is not just fine because it's eloquent. What if I ranted for the extermination of a people in an eloquent manner, would that make it fine? Rather, ranting, be it fanatical or otherwise, is fine if what is said is true and just.---PeterD, in reply to IreneY and Annis

latin words in poetry did not take their main influence from accent but from quantity. accordingly the elegiac metre, inherited and refined from the greek precedent, was perhaps the most common metre employed in latin. its early origins are with the neoterics, it reached its technical peak with ovid, and it has continued, relatively unabated, to this day.
the effect of accent was made secondary, though its consideration is still important. for instance, the consideration of ictus resulted in the general stylistic rule that the hexameter should end with a di- or tri-syllable. since the penultimate syllable of the line must needs be long, the accent always coincided with the arsis of the sixth foot. additionally, whether this last word be of two or three syllables, the accent of the preceeding word will necessarily coincide with the arsis of the fifth foot. the hexameter line will therefore end with a pleasing coincidence of arsis and ictus in the last two feet. such coincidences, however, were avoided generally in the second, third and fourth.

as for iambics, they never really took off in latin. the finest example of their employment (in trimeter at any rate) is perhaps catullus IV.

whiteoctave wrote:the 5th foot spondee is a licence well used, surely for the gravity of my Draconian demands.

I could find no way around that in the time I had. I think it would have reduced the effect a bit if I took a week to produce a couplet telling you not to rush us.

finally, the flow of the pent., with such exquisite use of the two hemiepes, is to be envied by all.

Getting the second hemiepes right took the most work, but I'm pleased how the line turned out: the echo of MouSaiS in neMeSiS, the double use of the negative, a verb ending each hemiepes. It's too bad Calvert Watkins doesn't visit us.

Chad, that's great! Next, you'll need to compose in Dactylo-epitrites, like Pindar used for the victory odes.

If you'll forgive me for entering workshopping mode briefly, the location of [face=spionic]xrusw=|[/face] is a bit of a shock. I'd be inclined to put that in place of [face=spionic]au)=tij[/face] (correption preserves the meter). The meter of [face=spionic]xrusw=|[/face] is fine, of course, with the hiatus across the caesura, but the sense is hard to connect to the verb in the previous line, for me at least.

Of course I should offer a suggestion for the missing uu-, but nothing comes to mind at the moment.

First of all, no caesura in the hexameter. You need this.
EITHER:
1) After the first sylllable of the third foot (Third strong)
OR
2) After the second of the third foot (assuming it's a dactyl) AND after the first syllables of the second and fourth foot.
At least that's the impression I got from reading WhiteO's piece.
This places considerable limitations on your choice and position of words.

Second, I believe in the second foot of your hexameter the second syllable is short by position since it is a short vowel, followed by a consonant which will, unfortunately attach itself to the beginning of the next syllable, because that syllable begins with a vowel.

So...

The syllable around the first "u" of "annus novus" is long here, but short in "annus octavus".

As for your pentameter (is the translation Watch me erring, just as I slip?)

That seems good to me. You might want to check with WhiteO whether long vowels can elide themselves like that. I've read that diphthongs can, so probably your verse is OK.

And the envy burns me up. You seem to have quite a good grasp of elision, which to me is the real bugbear preventing any kind of progress. I suppose that once I'm used to the idea, it will be quite natural. Until then, however......

You see the difficulty is that dactyls are required in many places, and it is quite impossible of course to find short syllables that do not end in vowels. But if vowels are used, then they tend to be elided with vowels or diphthongs beginning the next word. This is especially difficult with the post caesura part of the pentameter, where I have found it difficult to resist the temptation to use "est", which will naturally elide the vowel of the previous syllable, making it long.

Of course, my grasp of Latin scansion will horrify the more skilled members here, so if I have misled you, I offer you my most heartfelt apologies.

First of all, no caesura in the hexameter. You need this.EITHER:1) After the first sylllable of the third foot (Third strong)OR2) After the second of the third foot (assuming it's a dactyl) AND after the first syllables of the second and fourth foot.At least that's the impression I got from reading WhiteO's piece.This places considerable limitations on your choice and position of words.

Second, I believe in the second foot of your hexameter the second syllable is short by position since it is a short vowel, followed by a consonant which will, unfortunately attach itself to the beginning of the next syllable, because that syllable begins with a vowel.

My scansion is extremely mediocre as well, so I was quite confident there would be mistakes in my first composition.

In this case there would be a caesura in the hexameter, but I was going on an assumption that I could choose how to break up acres, similarly to something like pa-tris or pat-ris. Do you suppose this works or am I still in error? Dave pointed out some previous errors, but he has not yet commented on this version.

As for your pentameter (is the translation Watch me erring, just as I slip?)

Yes, that is what I mean, or "Watch me erring, (watch) how I slip" - same difference.

You might want to check with WhiteO whether long vowels can elide themselves like that. I've read that diphthongs can, so probably your verse is OK.

I hope so, or perhaps it can be short (though I doubt it).

And the envy burns me up. You seem to have quite a good grasp of elision, which to me is the real bugbear preventing any kind of progress. I suppose that once I'm used to the idea, it will be quite natural. Until then, however......

I spent a good amount of my day reading through the prosody section of A&G yesterday, although most of the time spent went into rearranging and reselecting words. A&G says that lines with lots of elisions are seen as ugly, which may help to emphasize the idea of going astray in my pentameter (though I shouldn't pretend to know what I am talking about ).

OK, you and I are talking at cross purposes here, but I still think that hexameter is a little bit dodgy.

I believe the second syllable of the third foot here is long. While you can certainly join the g to the next syllable to create "in-gra" I still think the "n" will have to stay at the end of the second syllable there.

So either way, your couplet is in trouble....

Look on the bright side, it can't possibly get as bad as mine.

I'm off to read some Propertius now. The muses are not coming to Romford tonight, if indeed they have ever been here.

EDIT: Yes, you can break up acres as you please. I've overlooked that. I was scanning your verse from the back, as is my habit, and assumed you wanted in-gra as two long syllables.

Last edited by Turpissimus on Thu Aug 05, 2004 11:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

If you'll forgive me for entering workshopping mode briefly, the location of xrusw=| is a bit of a shock. I'd be inclined to put that in place of au)=tij (correption preserves the meter). The meter of xrusw=| is fine, of course, with the hiatus across the caesura, but the sense is hard to connect to the verb in the previous line, for me at least.

Thanks for your help Will: Dave mentioned the same thing. I think this might be a better 2nd line:

once again, the Olympic champions will be crowned,and will come home to the Antipodes with gold.

it gets rid of the hiatus at the caesura, and it no longer resurrects digamma at a)nassome/nwn, 2 rules in your (once again excellent) .pdf on writing elegaic couplets, as linked above.

I don't know how to get rid of the hiatus at the fem caesura in the first line though, without throwing it to the end of the line and re-writing the line: do you think I should do that as well? Thanks, Chad.

chad wrote:it gets rid of the hiatus at the caesura, and it no longer resurrects digamma at a)nassome/nwn, 2 rules in your (once again excellent) .pdf on writing elegaic couplets, as linked above.

I have pondered. I have browsed parts of the Greek Anthology.

I have consulted the Holy Books, namely M.L. West's Greek Metre.

Early elegiasts do tolerate hiatus across the caesura. They also seem perfectly happy to resurrect digamma. Due to private reading I've been focusing a lot on Imperial poets recently, and I've skewed my advice to their much stricter practice. I'll be updating the Guide soon to make that clear.

I don't know how to get rid of the hiatus at the fem caesura in the first line though, without throwing it to the end of the line and re-writing the line: do you think I should do that as well?

Whoo, boy. Now we're playing with deep mojo. I could find no direct comment in His Metrical Holiness' works about correption at the caesura. I did, however, find this line in Homer after a few minutes: